If you hear it enough, it must be true…

“Try this experiment.

Ring up your credit card company at the end of this month. Tell them that you and your spouse can’t seem to reach an agreement about how to allocate your monthly budget.

So in the meantime, you have been forced to shutdown your household… but you hope to be back on track in a few weeks.

Chances are, they won’t take you seriously. Yet for some reason, this has been dismissed as commonplace and benign in the Land of the Free.

Here’s a list of quotes we’ve heard from the telescreen talking heads over the last 24-hours:

“We’re still the richest most powerful nation in the world.” 

“It doesn’t matter, the bond market is going up.”

“The United States will never default.”

The hubris and arrogance here is amazing. And it just goes to show that if you just repeat something over and over again, people will believe it… no matter how absurd. [the bold is my addition]

This is the basic premise behind propaganda. Start with an idea. Inundate the population through constant repetition. And soon it becomes the unquestionable truth.” – taken from The Sovereign Man

“… if you just repeat something over and over again, people will believe it… no matter how absurd.

For many of us since we were little, we have heard that if we work hard, learn all we can and apply what we have learned that we will be successful which will bring us happiness.  In fact, I receive emails daily from marketers saying that they just made a gazillion dollars and if I just follow their proven success model, I will have a gazillion dollars as well.

Many of the top gurus on the guru circuit tell us to just believe in ourselves and anything is possible.  It was John Locke in the 1600’s who was first credited with this notion [although perhaps over the centuries his meaning took on a life of its own to become other than what he may have intended] when he stated that  the mind was a blank slate [BS].  In 1926 Edward Bernays wrote the book “Propaganda” which added to the notion that we can have [perhaps must have] whatever we desire if we just “do it”.

So, by hearing it over and over since birth that I can and do deserve to have anything and everything that I want, it must be true, right?

Then in 2012 Mike R. Jay released his newest book @F-L-O-W: Find, Design, Use TALENT to Emerge Happiness & Success in a Postmodern World which presented another lens at which to view one’s world and suggested that what Locke and Bernays believed was not necessarily true for everyone.

To look at some comparisons between @BS and @F-L-O-W, visit

Assessments and MBTI

The following is from a post Mike put out to his Inner Circle:

These articles are pushed out every so often as each person who pushes them out has their own model to promote and invariably find it difficult to assess why they would come out opposite on an MBTI, which for me is often easy to explain @F-L-O-W… especially if one is moving through stages of want and need.  Often I find people answer the self-report during various stages of their own confusion about who they are and what they want.

The MBTI deserves a lot of criticism, but what a marvelous model to help us understand things that no other assessment can provide.

I like using a portfolio as each model has something to offer and something lost. And piecing together the puzzle of who we are is important part of the process @F-L-O-W.

Thanks for sharing the article, and POV, Pat and Russ!

I’ve written some about Pink’s Pop Psychology as has Reiss, and of course generalization @BS across any model has diminishing returns.

If anyone thinks having a call to discuss this article in light of the contentions brought forward by the author, I can explain a number of the issues including his opposite rating (especially for INTJ, by the way, one of the most “imaginative” types, hehe).

At this point, I’ve never really been able to discover who INTJs are anyway, as we have a number of this rarest type (Jung was INTJ) on this list, and they are “special”. <g>



The article can be found at


One more idea:

I have found in my almost 2 decades of using assessments, that people who criticize the assessments most, don’t understand them.

I have found in my experience, that ONLY a few people can actually identify the dominant function in their MBTI Type Dynamics, which goes to show that in a lot of cases, people who criticize something don’t really understand it fully enough to make the criticism.

This doesn’t mean the MBTI doesn’t have issues, especially as used by MOST (literal) practitioners.  For those of us who value the input provided by the MBTI, most of which can DIRECTLY predict the Big 5 results — and vice a versa — meaning that the MBTI is as valid as the Big 5 (one can predict the results of the other — something which the author failed to mention!), we find the MBTI useful.

If you search MBTI and Big 5, you will see a LOT of criticism for the MBTI, and it’s justified if people think the MBTI is used for prediction. It is not… anymore than most other assessments.

If used for self-knowledge, the MBTI can provide extremely valuable insights into the perspectives that we take and how we take them, as well as a myriad other ideas that come from the information.

I will say this, that the standard 100 question survey is not as valuable to us as the Step II, which has a lot more questions and a lot more specific information, which is very useable in helping us understand how our views of things are formed and manipulated for filters and bias — specifically.

I’m convinced we have more to gain than lose if we include the MBTI data in our self-knowledge journey.  So I’ll keep recommending it, as well as the free Big 5 that is available online!


NOTE: In our course called Living at FLOW, we give you access to 8 different assessments and when you take them and send the results to Mike, he will give you feedback on the meaning derived from those assessments.  This alone is worth many times more that what you will pay for the course.


Team @F-L-O-W